Computational Workflow for Refining AlphaFold Models in Drug Design Using Kinetic and Thermodynamic Binding Calculations: A Case Study for the Unresolved Inactive Human Adenosine A₃ Receptor

A structure-based drug design pipeline that considers both thermodynamic and kinetic binding data of ligands against a receptor will enable the computational design of improved drug molecules. For unresolved GPCR-ligand complexes, a workflow that can apply both thermodynamic and kinetic binding data in combination with alpha-fold (AF)-derived or other homology models and experimentally resolved binding modes of relevant ligands in GPCR-homologs needs to be tested. Here, as test case, we studied a congeneric set of ligands that bind to a structurally unresolved G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR), the inactive human adenosine A3 receptor (hA3R). We tested three available homology models from which two have been generated from experimental structures of hA1R or hA2AR and one model was a multistate alphafold 2 (AF2)-derived model. We applied alchemical calculations with thermodynamic integration coupled with molecular dynamics (TI/MD) simulations to calculate the experimental relative binding free energies and residence time (τ)-random accelerated MD (τ-RAMD) simulations to calculate the relative residence times (RTs) for antagonists. While the TI/MD calculations produced, for the three homology models, good Pearson correlation coefficients, correspondingly, r = 0.74, 0.62, and 0.67 and mean unsigned error (mue) values of 0.94, 1.31, and 0.81 kcal mol–1, the τ-RAMD method showed r = 0.92 and 0.52 for the first two models but failed to produce accurate results for the multistate AF2-derived model. With subsequent optimization of the AF2-derived model by reorientation of the side chain of R1735.34 located in the extracellular loop 2 (EL2) that blocked ligand’s unbinding, the computational model showed r = 0.84 for kinetic data and improved performance for thermodynamic data (r = 0.81, mue = 0.56 kcal mol–1). Overall, after refining the multistate AF2 model with physics-based tools, we were able to show a strong correlation between predicted and experimental ligand relative residence times and affinities, achieving a level of accuracy comparable to an experimental structure. The computational workflow used can be applied to other receptors, helping to rank candidate drugs in a congeneric series and enabling the prioritization of leads with stronger binding affinities and longer residence times

Dual A1/A3 Adenosine Receptor Antagonists: Binding Kinetics and Structure−Activity Relationship Studies Using Mutagenesis and Alchemical Binding Free Energy Calculations

Drugs targeting adenosine receptors (AR) can provide treatment for diseases. We report the identification of 7-(phenylamino)-pyrazolo[3,4-c]​pyridines L2–L10, A15, and A17 as low-micromolar to low-nanomolar A1R/A3R dual antagonists, with 3-phenyl-5-cyano-7-(trimethoxyphenylamino)-pyrazolo[3,4-c]​pyridine (A17) displaying the highest affinity at both receptors with a long residence time of binding, as determined using a NanoBRET-based assay. Two binding orientations of A17 produce stable complexes inside the orthosteric binding area of A1R in molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, and we selected the most plausible orientation based on the agreement with alanine mutagenesis supported by affinity experiments. Interestingly, for drug design purposes, the mutation of L2506.51 to alanine increased the binding affinity of A17 at A1R. We explored the structure–activity relationships against A1R using alchemical binding free energy calculations with the thermodynamic integration coupled with the MD simulation (TI/MD) method, applied on the whole G-protein-coupled receptor–membrane system, which showed a good agreement (r = 0.73) between calculated and experimental relative binding free energies

Dual A1/A3 Adenosine Receptor Antagonists: Binding Kinetics and Structure−Activity Relationship Studies Using Mutagenesis and Alchemical Binding Free Energy Calculations

Drugs targeting adenosine receptors (AR) can provide treatment for diseases. We report the identification of 7-(phenylamino)-pyrazolo[3,4-c]​pyridines L2–L10, A15, and A17 as low-micromolar to low-nanomolar A1R/A3R dual antagonists, with 3-phenyl-5-cyano-7-(trimethoxyphenylamino)-pyrazolo[3,4-c]​pyridine (A17) displaying the highest affinity at both receptors with a long residence time of binding, as determined using a NanoBRET-based assay. Two binding orientations of A17 produce stable complexes inside the orthosteric binding area of A1R in molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, and we selected the most plausible orientation based on the agreement with alanine mutagenesis supported by affinity experiments. Interestingly, for drug design purposes, the mutation of L2506.51 to alanine increased the binding affinity of A17 at A1R. We explored the structure–activity relationships against A1R using alchemical binding free energy calculations with the thermodynamic integration coupled with the MD simulation (TI/MD) method, applied on the whole G-protein-coupled receptor–membrane system, which showed a good agreement (r = 0.73) between calculated and experimental relative binding free energies

Dual A1/A3 Adenosine Receptor Antagonists: Binding Kinetics and Structure−Activity Relationship Studies Using Mutagenesis and Alchemical Binding Free Energy Calculations

Drugs targeting adenosine receptors (AR) can provide treatment for diseases. We report the identification of 7-(phenylamino)-pyrazolo[3,4-c]​pyridines L2–L10, A15, and A17 as low-micromolar to low-nanomolar A1R/A3R dual antagonists, with 3-phenyl-5-cyano-7-(trimethoxyphenylamino)-pyrazolo[3,4-c]​pyridine (A17) displaying the highest affinity at both receptors with a long residence time of binding, as determined using a NanoBRET-based assay. Two binding orientations of A17 produce stable complexes inside the orthosteric binding area of A1R in molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, and we selected the most plausible orientation based on the agreement with alanine mutagenesis supported by affinity experiments. Interestingly, for drug design purposes, the mutation of L2506.51 to alanine increased the binding affinity of A17 at A1R. We explored the structure–activity relationships against A1R using alchemical binding free energy calculations with the thermodynamic integration coupled with the MD simulation (TI/MD) method, applied on the whole G-protein-coupled receptor–membrane system, which showed a good agreement (r = 0.73) between calculated and experimental relative binding free energies

Dual A1/A3 Adenosine Receptor Antagonists: Binding Kinetics and Structure−Activity Relationship Studies Using Mutagenesis and Alchemical Binding Free Energy Calculations

Drugs targeting adenosine receptors (AR) can provide treatment for diseases. We report the identification of 7-(phenylamino)-pyrazolo[3,4-c]​pyridines L2–L10, A15, and A17 as low-micromolar to low-nanomolar A1R/A3R dual antagonists, with 3-phenyl-5-cyano-7-(trimethoxyphenylamino)-pyrazolo[3,4-c]​pyridine (A17) displaying the highest affinity at both receptors with a long residence time of binding, as determined using a NanoBRET-based assay. Two binding orientations of A17 produce stable complexes inside the orthosteric binding area of A1R in molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, and we selected the most plausible orientation based on the agreement with alanine mutagenesis supported by affinity experiments. Interestingly, for drug design purposes, the mutation of L2506.51 to alanine increased the binding affinity of A17 at A1R. We explored the structure–activity relationships against A1R using alchemical binding free energy calculations with the thermodynamic integration coupled with the MD simulation (TI/MD) method, applied on the whole G-protein-coupled receptor–membrane system, which showed a good agreement (r = 0.73) between calculated and experimental relative binding free energies

Dual A1/A3 Adenosine Receptor Antagonists: Binding Kinetics and Structure−Activity Relationship Studies Using Mutagenesis and Alchemical Binding Free Energy Calculations

Drugs targeting adenosine receptors (AR) can provide treatment for diseases. We report the identification of 7-(phenylamino)-pyrazolo[3,4-c]​pyridines L2–L10, A15, and A17 as low-micromolar to low-nanomolar A1R/A3R dual antagonists, with 3-phenyl-5-cyano-7-(trimethoxyphenylamino)-pyrazolo[3,4-c]​pyridine (A17) displaying the highest affinity at both receptors with a long residence time of binding, as determined using a NanoBRET-based assay. Two binding orientations of A17 produce stable complexes inside the orthosteric binding area of A1R in molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, and we selected the most plausible orientation based on the agreement with alanine mutagenesis supported by affinity experiments. Interestingly, for drug design purposes, the mutation of L2506.51 to alanine increased the binding affinity of A17 at A1R. We explored the structure–activity relationships against A1R using alchemical binding free energy calculations with the thermodynamic integration coupled with the MD simulation (TI/MD) method, applied on the whole G-protein-coupled receptor–membrane system, which showed a good agreement (r = 0.73) between calculated and experimental relative binding free energies

Dual A1/A3 Adenosine Receptor Antagonists: Binding Kinetics and Structure−Activity Relationship Studies Using Mutagenesis and Alchemical Binding Free Energy Calculations

Drugs targeting adenosine receptors (AR) can provide treatment for diseases. We report the identification of 7-(phenylamino)-pyrazolo[3,4-c]​pyridines L2–L10, A15, and A17 as low-micromolar to low-nanomolar A1R/A3R dual antagonists, with 3-phenyl-5-cyano-7-(trimethoxyphenylamino)-pyrazolo[3,4-c]​pyridine (A17) displaying the highest affinity at both receptors with a long residence time of binding, as determined using a NanoBRET-based assay. Two binding orientations of A17 produce stable complexes inside the orthosteric binding area of A1R in molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, and we selected the most plausible orientation based on the agreement with alanine mutagenesis supported by affinity experiments. Interestingly, for drug design purposes, the mutation of L2506.51 to alanine increased the binding affinity of A17 at A1R. We explored the structure–activity relationships against A1R using alchemical binding free energy calculations with the thermodynamic integration coupled with the MD simulation (TI/MD) method, applied on the whole G-protein-coupled receptor–membrane system, which showed a good agreement (r = 0.73) between calculated and experimental relative binding free energies

Dual A1/A3 Adenosine Receptor Antagonists: Binding Kinetics and Structure−Activity Relationship Studies Using Mutagenesis and Alchemical Binding Free Energy Calculations

Drugs targeting adenosine receptors (AR) can provide treatment for diseases. We report the identification of 7-(phenylamino)-pyrazolo[3,4-c]​pyridines L2–L10, A15, and A17 as low-micromolar to low-nanomolar A1R/A3R dual antagonists, with 3-phenyl-5-cyano-7-(trimethoxyphenylamino)-pyrazolo[3,4-c]​pyridine (A17) displaying the highest affinity at both receptors with a long residence time of binding, as determined using a NanoBRET-based assay. Two binding orientations of A17 produce stable complexes inside the orthosteric binding area of A1R in molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, and we selected the most plausible orientation based on the agreement with alanine mutagenesis supported by affinity experiments. Interestingly, for drug design purposes, the mutation of L2506.51 to alanine increased the binding affinity of A17 at A1R. We explored the structure–activity relationships against A1R using alchemical binding free energy calculations with the thermodynamic integration coupled with the MD simulation (TI/MD) method, applied on the whole G-protein-coupled receptor–membrane system, which showed a good agreement (r = 0.73) between calculated and experimental relative binding free energies

Dual A1/A3 Adenosine Receptor Antagonists: Binding Kinetics and Structure−Activity Relationship Studies Using Mutagenesis and Alchemical Binding Free Energy Calculations

Drugs targeting adenosine receptors (AR) can provide treatment for diseases. We report the identification of 7-(phenylamino)-pyrazolo[3,4-c]​pyridines L2–L10, A15, and A17 as low-micromolar to low-nanomolar A1R/A3R dual antagonists, with 3-phenyl-5-cyano-7-(trimethoxyphenylamino)-pyrazolo[3,4-c]​pyridine (A17) displaying the highest affinity at both receptors with a long residence time of binding, as determined using a NanoBRET-based assay. Two binding orientations of A17 produce stable complexes inside the orthosteric binding area of A1R in molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, and we selected the most plausible orientation based on the agreement with alanine mutagenesis supported by affinity experiments. Interestingly, for drug design purposes, the mutation of L2506.51 to alanine increased the binding affinity of A17 at A1R. We explored the structure–activity relationships against A1R using alchemical binding free energy calculations with the thermodynamic integration coupled with the MD simulation (TI/MD) method, applied on the whole G-protein-coupled receptor–membrane system, which showed a good agreement (r = 0.73) between calculated and experimental relative binding free energies

Dual A1/A3 Adenosine Receptor Antagonists: Binding Kinetics and Structure−Activity Relationship Studies Using Mutagenesis and Alchemical Binding Free Energy Calculations

Drugs targeting adenosine receptors (AR) can provide treatment for diseases. We report the identification of 7-(phenylamino)-pyrazolo[3,4-c]​pyridines L2–L10, A15, and A17 as low-micromolar to low-nanomolar A1R/A3R dual antagonists, with 3-phenyl-5-cyano-7-(trimethoxyphenylamino)-pyrazolo[3,4-c]​pyridine (A17) displaying the highest affinity at both receptors with a long residence time of binding, as determined using a NanoBRET-based assay. Two binding orientations of A17 produce stable complexes inside the orthosteric binding area of A1R in molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, and we selected the most plausible orientation based on the agreement with alanine mutagenesis supported by affinity experiments. Interestingly, for drug design purposes, the mutation of L2506.51 to alanine increased the binding affinity of A17 at A1R. We explored the structure–activity relationships against A1R using alchemical binding free energy calculations with the thermodynamic integration coupled with the MD simulation (TI/MD) method, applied on the whole G-protein-coupled receptor–membrane system, which showed a good agreement (r = 0.73) between calculated and experimental relative binding free energies